The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Whoops! Quite right, Chris. The shape of the bridge (non-Breitling) had me fooled. It looks like the elegant Valjoux but, as you say, the angle and position of the fixing screw tell the tale.
Same style found on my old Benrus, so I should've picked it up:




Good call & thanks,
T.

Bills explanation appears to me very plausible, but how does CLEBAR ( = ZODIAC) fit in ?



If we look at the back covers of the Breitling Premier 790 from Michaelhase, Bills Premier 790, and the Clebar 790, then we can't but come to only one conclusion: One source, even the serial numbers have been stamped by the same machine! I doubt that Clebar was the source.
It seems that Breitling had the shelves full of cases and ébauches for their Premiers and decided to sell to whoever wanted them.

Regards,
Chris

Seems very plausible, as I imagine it would be Breitling itself that stamped the cases after receiving them from the case manufacturer (which was a different entity/subcontractor, AFAIK.). Perhaps this was do to the discontinuation of this style of watch at the end of WWII?

Now, if it was somehow not Breitling who did the stamping but this was also left to the case manufacturer, then the possibility exists that the cases were sold by the manufacturer as excess inventory if for some reason Breitling did not purchase the full run of Premier cases.

Like I said, I would imagine it was Breitling who did the stamping (easy work really) but I just don't know with 100% certainty if this was their procedure at this time (ca. mid 1940s). Maybe someone else here does know for sure?
Best,
T.

As an aside, it appears that not many chronograph watches at all were produced by Breitling in 1944:
1944 Chrono SNs: 563659-568959 = 5300 Chronos produced

Could perhaps this one fall under something like the topic we're discussing?

http://cgi.ebay.com/XLNT-VINTAGE-BREITL ... 4a9ed54ab6

I don't think I've ever seen one signed "anti-choc"... the script looks off and the bridge engraving doesn't look consistent with ones I've seen either...

_________________
"I don't got the bright watch I got the right watch" -Jay Z

I've seen a few anti choc watches - it's just French for anti shock so in and of itself it's not terribly helpful. However the dial has clearly been redone - look at the condition relative to the hands.

I'm not a fan of this one - the bridge seems inconsistent age wise with the movement, and while we can't assume that the 'normal rules' apply on some of these pieces the Breitling engraving looks wrong to me.

I don't like this.

A very interesting 788 : http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie ... 3DWatching

I completely missed the posting in February calling attention to the Clebar-signed 790. I must have been off on an extra-terrestrial saunter . . .

When I noticed it today along with Alex's siting of another Clebar, I thinks to myself that it's time to reconsider the previous working hypothesis. But, I think it turns out that the pattern still holds.

Meyers' Horological Trademark Index (2004) tells us that "Clebar" was first used by Edward Trauner Inc., New York, 21 September 1925 and was registered as a trademark 9 June 1955. He also notes that "Sea Skate" was registered by Trauner in 1960, and that was an alternate name for a Zodiac Sea Wolf.

Separately, he has an entry for Clebar Watch Co., New York, which used the "Clebar" mark since 21 September 1925, but registered it 21 January 1948.

Pritchard lists the Clebar Watch Co., New York as an importer doing business in 1955 - stop watches, chronographs, time study watches, yacht timers, a watches with subsidiary seconds.

In her entry for Zodiac S.A. (reproduced at www.vintagezodiacs.com), she has a few notes on Trauner: "A 1955 ad from the ZODIAC WATCH AGENCY, New York ( a division of Edward Trauner Inc.) . . ." The lash up is most likely in 1955, when Ariste Calame died and Trauner registered "Clebar."

I'm inclined to think that Trauner/Clebar was an importer of Breitling in the mid-1940s, pre-Breitling of America days, just like Horowitz/Mervos, Sickles/Belmar, and Weissman/Welsbro. Presumably, Trauner/Clebar later had a tie-up with Zodiac like Wakmann did with Breitling. I think we've been assuming an identity of a single company that just wasn't there. But, heck, I don't intend to study up on Zodiac history, I'm a Breitling collector.

I wish I could see all the import codes on all the movements of all the chronographs produced in the 1940s. We need a better compilation. The listing Ranfft assumes the importer is the maker, so we have the bonus Breitling import code WXZ. Who's dat?

And, finally, I can't guess where that "Venus" dial comes from. From it's freshness, I would guess it's a recent replacement dial. The rest of the watch looks very Breitling 788.

But what about the relations between Clebar, Zodiac and Heuer ?

Take a look: http://www.onthedash.com/poormans.shtml

Well, that's an entirely different discussion that might be better conducted on a Heuer forum. I did that a year or so ago to ask Jeff the basis of his claims in the "Poor Man's Heuer" section of his "On the Dash" website. While I am fully prepared to believe that Heuer contracted to make watches for other companies, like Clebar in New York, it is simply not adequate to claim that Heuer made the watch because it looks like a Heuer-branded watch. Designs and case sources were just too common in the Swiss watch industry to make claims like that.

So for example, he maintains that the blackened LeJour chrono is a Poor Man's Heuer Pasadena, when I think it might be better to say the Heuer Pasadena is a rich man's Orfina Porsche Design, since in that instance we well know that Ferdinand Porsche was the origin of the case design and dial layout. I invite others to look at his gallery. Maybe you'll think some are more derivative of Breitling designs or another maker.

Jeff's sole justification is that he once met someone who worked at Heuer in the 1970s and he said they made watches for other companies. I have little doubt that Heuer made, assembled or sourced parts for finished watches throughout its history. Breitling did, too. But, to my thinking, to claim that Heuer made it requires more than a close or passing resemblance. The Fortis and Tourneau I have are otherwise clearly marked as Heuer-Leonidas on the case (look between the lugs for a Heuer reference number) and movement and otherwise match a known Heuer model.

But, now we're confusing this thread even more. We were focusing on importation practices for Breitling in the pre-Breitling of America era. Now we're discussing watch production in the 1970s. And, you know, it didn't end well for either Breitling or Heuer.

Thanks for the explanations Bill,

it shows us very interesting parallel developments between Heuer and Breitling.

Reviving a very old thread for documentation sake, I saw this Belmar chrono, clearly with Breitling Premier DNA in the dial, sell on eBay last week, offered by Mentawatches in Florida. Breitling import code on the balance bridge.

EXN = Breitling ?

_________________
"I spent most of my money on Booze, Breitling and Boats. The rest I wasted" - mostly Elmore Leonard

yes, Rene
also UZO and WXZ

http://www.ranfft.de/uhr/info-uscode-e.html

WXZ was added by 'you know who' because he had a single (fake) watch he tried to peddle as a 'B'

I'd be careful with ranfft and on the others I am trying to figure out where I left my fence

_________________
"I spent most of my money on Booze, Breitling and Boats. The rest I wasted" - mostly Elmore Leonard